(13-02-2017 09:51 PM)Unbeliever Wrote: If that isn't your assertion, then, I ask again: What difference do you claim that there would be between a universe designed for us and one that is not?

I wonder why Tomasia thinks that a universe designed for us would have our closest star emitting cancer-causing radiation.

“I am quite sure now that often, very often, in matters concerning religion and politics a man’s reasoning powers are not above the monkey’s.”~Mark Twain
“Ocean: A body of water occupying about two-thirds of a world made for man - who has no gills.”~ Ambrose Bierce

(13-02-2017 09:51 PM)Unbeliever Wrote: If that isn't your assertion, then, I ask again: What difference do you claim that there would be between a universe designed for us and one that is not?

I wonder why Tomasia thinks that a universe designed for us would have our closest star emitting cancer-causing radiation.

Designed for us? A universe in which humans are out numbered by black holes? A universe that contains more stars than all of the grains of sand on all of the beaches of our world? A world for which even we can only inhabit a small portion of the surface crust, the vast majority of it being hostile to our presence? A world with unlimited desires but limited resources, inevitably leading to conflict? A world of uncontrollable and unforeseeable hazards, such as natural disasters, cancer, plagues and pathogens?

By any reasonable human standard, if there is a designer involved and humanity was their end goal, they were incredibly inept, inefficient, and callous.

The universe is not designed with us in mind, rather we have adapted to our infinitesimally small part of the universe we find ourselves occupying. We are water filling a hole in the ground to make a puddle; the hole was not fine tuned for us, all we've done is fill in the available divot according to the rules that govern our reality.

I will say that it's clever. He doesn't argue to find things out or to gain deeper understanding, he argues to "win", and he does have good strategy in that regard. All his weaseling around, pretending to have answered questions that he hasn't, supercilious sneering and the like, they serve to convince an outside observer who's not going to dig through piles of crap, that he's this most reasonable of men, and that everyone calling him a dickhead is just what they were always told to expect atheists to be - "fallen".

We'll love you just the way you are
If you're perfect -- Alanis Morissette

(06-02-2014 03:47 PM)Momsurroundedbyboys Wrote: And I'm giving myself a conclusion again from all the facepalming.

(13-02-2017 09:51 PM)Unbeliever Wrote: That wasn't the question. You don't understand why an atheists like Dawkins acknowledges the appearance of design? It's a position you can't relate to, or comprehend the reason for such views? You just don't get it right?

No. I get it. I just don't agree, even taking it at face value (and, in case it was not painfully obvious, the posters here have long since stopped taking anything you quote at face value; I just can't be bothered to go digging for the full quote, as it's irrelevant).
[/quote]

Then you don't seem to be making much sense. You claim you get it, what exactly do you think you get? And what exactly do you think you don't agree with them about?

You get why nature appears designed to them, even though they know it's not? What do you disagree with? That they don't see this appearance of design? Or are you saying you get why they see it, but just don't see it personally?

Quote:Funny. Because that's what you said.

If that isn't your assertion, then, I ask again: What difference do you claim that there would be between a universe designed for us and one that is not?

Sorry, I didn't notice you said "designed for us", rather than just designed. I believe the universe was designed I don't necessarily believe it was designed for us.

So the difference stated applied to how I initially understood your question.

And secondly what I mean by the universe includes us, that I'm not speaking of a part of the universe, but the totalility of it. We're a part of that created order, and not mere recipients of it.

"Tell me, muse, of the storyteller who has been thrust to the edge of the world, both an infant and an ancient, and through him reveal everyman." ---Homer the aged poet.

"In Him was life, and the life was the Light of men. The Light shines in the darkness, and the darkness did not comprehend it."

(14-02-2017 01:09 AM)‘EvolutionKills Wrote: ...all we’ve done is fill in the available divot according to the rules that govern our reality.

Love the golf analogy.

“I am quite sure now that often, very often, in matters concerning religion and politics a man’s reasoning powers are not above the monkey’s.”~Mark Twain
“Ocean: A body of water occupying about two-thirds of a world made for man - who has no gills.”~ Ambrose Bierce

(13-02-2017 06:49 PM)Unbeliever Wrote: If that isn't your assertion, then, I ask again: What difference do you claim that there would be between a universe designed for us and one that is not?

Sorry, I didn't notice you said "designed for us", rather than just designed. I believe the universe was designed I don't necessarily believe it was designed for us.

What gives you that impression Tom?

Is it the chaos? The meteors and comets hurtling through space crashing into other celestial bodies? The black holes swallowing up everything that gets too close? Is it the constant shifting of plates on the crust of planets or the volcanoes they create that release the pressures? Or is it the stars going super Nova and obliterating themselves and any other celestial bodies nearby? Help me out here.

“I am quite sure now that often, very often, in matters concerning religion and politics a man’s reasoning powers are not above the monkey’s.”~Mark Twain
“Ocean: A body of water occupying about two-thirds of a world made for man - who has no gills.”~ Ambrose Bierce

The following 2 users Like Full Circle's post:2 users Like Full Circle's postRik (14-02-2017), morondog (14-02-2017)

(14-02-2017 06:38 AM)Tomasia Wrote: Sorry, I didn't notice you said "designed for us", rather than just designed. I believe the universe was designed I don't necessarily believe it was designed for us.

So the difference stated applied to how I initially understood your question.

And secondly what I mean by the universe includes us, that I'm not speaking of a part of the universe, but the totalility of it. We're a part of that created order, and not mere recipients of it.

What was the universe designed for? Since it looks designed to you, you must have a reason for thinking it is.
Please enlighten us with your deep teleological insight.